zlacker

>>delbar+(OP)
Unfortunately, I do not have the chops to debate against this, but the political ramifications would be immense. The bet (https://www.rootclaim.com/rootclaim_challenge) requires that (a) you have $100k (b) are able to successfully debate it.

I won't put $100k against this, but I'll put $10k against it, because "the truth" is worth it. I'll pool $10k into a $100k stake behind a debate team that can debate this (and validate that this is actually refutable). This is valid until 2021-03-01.

>>sargun+rp
Please clarify your date format. Is that 1st of March or the day before 4th of January? According to my European sentiment it's the 3rd of January, is that correct?

>>Torwal+Vw
Most often I see this as an example of ISO 8061 date, https://www.iso.org/iso-8601-date-and-time-format.html .

"Looking for an unambiguous calendar-and-clock format that is internationally understood? It’s time for ISO 8601."

"ISO 8601 tackles this uncertainty by setting out an internationally agreed way to represent dates:

YYYY-MM-DD

For example, September 27, 2012 is represented as 2012-09-27."